In response to my previous diatribe (on the MD Green Party listserv) about Nader, 9-11 and the
November elections I got an email from a Green. The writer asks:s
Who would I support when Kucinich and Sharpton are no longer running? (In this
likely scenario McKinney will continue to be refusing to join the Greens. Also,
Nader is running as an Independent.)
I'll assume that the reader is familiar with the arguments about why 9-11 was
a fraud that had nothing to do with Muslims. (If not, some recommended links are at
the bottom.) In addition, that the reader understands the stakes involved this
year. Without trying to being overly dramatic about it, the 2004 elections in
the US are shaping up to be the most important in world history. The outlook
for most of the world if Bush and the neoconservatives are not removed from power is
At this time I don't have a strong feeling for whether I'd vote for Nader or Dean. One
votes for Dean to stop Bush now, for Nader to save the country over time. Both
are credible goals. We know what the cost is to vote for Nader. (In Democrat-safe Maryland the cost is neglible. Elsewhere in the country it is not a vote to remove Bush from office.) It is also hard to
determine at the present what the cost will be to vote for Dean. (Just how close to Bush Dean really is unclear. At this writing, Dean has a very similiar foreign policy. Still, there is some sign that Dean might be the leading candidate for the subject of 9-11 to be critically discussed in public. Also, Dean's poll numbers soared when he opposed the Iraq war. If he gets in trouble perhaps he'd appeal to the antiwar movement to regain his political strength.)
Greens should understand there is a limited lifespan for the "not voting for the lesser of two evils argument." There is no known Green Party in the West Bank or Gaza Strip. The speed with which this country is moving towards a dictatorship suggests that life
very shortly may compare to living in those places.
With the understanding that "whom one should support in 2004" means not simply voting, but actually working for, I'm not working for any candidate who isn't making the integrity of the 2004 election his or her top issue. That may mean that I won't be supporting anyone in particular.
The Most Important Issue in 2004
This an election about information. The only way that Bush and company can
be stopped is if the Internet (and word of mouth) can generate a
grassroots movement to save
the 2004 US Presidential election. The general public, exposed to politics
exclusively from the mainstream media, receives too narrow a range of expression for
democracy to exist. That seemingly makes the task of the Bush regime sponsoring another
9-11 (or a much less elaborate hoax) in order to declare martial law very easy.
I believe a race is on between the Bush regime and the democracy-minded activists. That race
is being conducted largely over the Internet. If another 9-11 is pulled off
before activists can expose to large numbers of people what the Bush regime is doing--they win. If not,
democracy may win. At this writing the outcome of this contest is uncertain.
When tens of millions marched against the
upcoming war last February (2/2002) democracy was winning and the Bush regime was
clearly losing. The amount of constructive information that circulated prior to
those marches was staggering. It was far more impressive than all of the feet that
made it to the marches--although obviously they were a big plus.
Let's be clear about the Bush regime's intentions. A
concentration camp in Cuba is holding hundreds of
men and teenagers taken from a battlefield on another
continent, held indefinitely in open-air cages for two years. They are continuously
interrogated, with no access to any courts for relief. Thousands more
immigrants have been swept
up, imprisoned without access to a lawyer. They are locked away
seemingly forever. US citizens are being detained indefinitely with no access to
attorneys, with no charges ever brought forward, arrested
solely on the word of the Chief Executive. The
government has given itself the ability to extract pretty much any fact
known about you without a warrant. Voting machines produced by a company whose
leader boasts in a
fundraising letters of his ability to produce votes for the
ruling party, etc.
That sounds to me like a
police state is near.
The problem with Greens and Independents supporting Ralph Nader is very little of his
message is tailored towards the #1 issue (i.e., the 2004 election. By the way, I voted
for Nader in 1996 and 2000 and am a Green Party member since 1996.) Nader
tells every audience not to worry about the possibility we're heading
rapidly towards a police state; instead focus on his
ideas about excessive corporatism, environmental racism and degradation, economic
inequality, health care, pensions, etc. It is a great message. However, it comes
at the wrong time.
Nader won't change his focus, either. I spent some time in his company (with 30
or so others) recently and he made it clear he won't raise alarms about the
2000 election theft, 9-11, the concentration camp in Cuba and other subjects of
maximum immediate concern.
We cannot work very hard for someone who isn't working on behalf of the integrity
of the next election. If that leaves us with no candidates to supprt then
so be it. This election is not about campaigns. It is about the ideas that must be
conveyed if a free election takes place. Candidates aren't Messiahs; we've got to
build this movement ourselves.
We can beat Bush. We did it
in February, 2003. The neocons
were out of their twisted minds at seeing tens of millions marching around this
tiny blue ball of fun.
To beat them we must tell people about
the immigrants detained,
September 11 remains the greatest Achilles Heel they've got. Even if one accepts the
cartoon story of the 19 homicidal, suicidal Muslim hijackers flying Boeings into
buildings there still is the issue of negligence. No captain of a ship is allowed
to stay in charge if he makes a serious mistake in the line of fire (John F. Kennedy
not withstanding). So too, no one should expect that the Commander in Chief shouldn't receive some form of
court martial for his
terrible example of negligence.
Those who are willing to get more involved with 9-11 should support
Ellen Mariani's lawsuit
against the Bush administration.
One doesn't have to know every detail of what the 911 Truth Movement is dealing
with to spread Ellen's website around. It takes unimaginable courage to do
what she's doing. So pass
Ellen Mariani's site along,
progressives! Support her!
For those who insist in getting even further involved with 911--by researching or
writing about it--check out the three websites below. Then keep on exploring until you
find other people who have the same interest you do.
If you can't bring yourself to discuss 9-11 at all then concentrate on the other
aspects of the encroaching police state. There are millions of people in the US that
must be reached. Meanwhile, the sands are falling from the hourglass very swiftly.
Scott Loughrey Top
Muslims Suspend the Laws of Physics
The collapse of the Twin Towers
Why did WTC 7, a 45-story steel building, suddenly collapse?